Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

hi all, need some help. I can't seem to find what I need in the search. Truther claims explosive residue was found in the moving van so says the declassified FBI report... I know this is bunk and I've seen something on it before, but can anyone help me with these and why they are not what the truthers claim they are? Namely PROOF that they had explosives in their moving van when it was stopped..

__________________"The Conservatives want to keep wogs out and march boldly back to the 1950s when Britain still had an Empire and blacks, women, poofs and Irish knew their place." The Don That's what we've sunk to here.

Do you have a URL for this FBI report? I understand you can't yet post a proper URL due to not having a sufficient number of posts in this forum yet (minimum is 15 posts), but it is okay and within the rules to post an "edited" URL - where you leave out the http, the \\ and the www.
This could help us help you.
Personally, I have never looked into this "van" issue, as I have never seen a persuasive argument from the "truther" side that it is an issue at all.

It doesn't trouble me, I am talking to a truther who claims the FBI report admits they found explosives in the Israelis van... Which even if they did means nothing... but do these items mean the van had explosives?

I was under the impression that the descriptions of the items didn't mean what truthers think they mean... Thought I read it before.

hi all, need some help. I can't seem to find what I need in the search. Truther claims explosive residue was found in the moving van so says the declassified FBI report... I know this is bunk and I've seen something on it before, but can anyone help me with these and why they are not what the truthers claim they are? Namely PROOF that they had explosives in their moving van when it was stopped..

Just a friendly note, we discuss a lot of bombings and conspiracy idiot theories in these pages. It would be very helpful if you would remember to indicate which conspiracy crap we are to be discussing here!!!! Thanks, fuelair, and welcome in unless you are just another CTer!!!

__________________There is no problem so great that it cannot be fixed by small explosives carefully placed.

Looks like they were just listing pieces of evidence collected, and listed that certain samples were taken to test for explosive residue. Just a theory anyway, I'm no expert.

That was my first thought too.

Yes for eg., swabs for explosive residue testing, nothing on the results of any swabs that were actually taken.

IOW, truthers saying this is evidence of explosives in the van is like looking at a grocery receipt that lists a bag of apples and sack of flour, and claiming the person who bought them has an apple pie.

Just a friendly note, we discuss a lot of bombings and conspiracy idiot theories in these pages. It would be very helpful if you would remember to indicate which conspiracy crap we are to be discussing here!!!! Thanks, fuelair, and welcome in unless you are just another CTer!!!

thank you and no, I am not a CTer... I apologize for not being more clear in the claim I was trying to get help on. I agree with the assessment of the other folks. if control swabs are mentioned, those seem very unlikely to be something they found in the van. From what I can tell, they found "gloves" and some "fabric"...recommended they use control swabs to test for explosive residue... and perhaps the mention of a bomb suit is suggesting they investigate if the gloves could be part of a bomb suit... does that sound about right? Sorry this isn't a more compelling topic. thank you for your assistance.

Yes for eg., swabs for explosive residue testing, nothing on the results of any swabs that were actually taken.

IOW, truthers saying this is evidence of explosives in the van is like looking at a grocery receipt list, that lists a bag of apples and sack of flour, and claiming the person who bought them had the list on them has an apple pie.

FTFY

__________________If you can't be a good example, then you'll just have to be a horrible warning.

IOW, truthers saying this is evidence of explosives in the van is like looking at a grocery receipt that lists a bag of apples and sack of flour, and claiming the person who bought them has an apple pie.

It's way more tenuous than that. It's of no more substance than declaring you checked someone's grocery bag to see if it smelled of apples or was dusted with flour, but without saying whether it was or not.

It's a no-smoke-without-fire argument which rests entirely on the inference that only notorious pie bakers would get their bag sniffed for apples.

It's a no-smoke-without-fire argument which rests entirely on the inference that only notorious pie bakers would get their bag sniffed for apples.

But it has the makings of an excellent heads-I-win, tails-you-lose argument for truthers. Ground Zero was never tested for explosives, therefore we can't conclude that there were no explosives there; the van was tested for explosives, so we can conclude that there were explosives in it. Taken to its logical conclusion, everything contains explosives. Which is of course consistent with the finding that everything is an inside job.

Dave

__________________Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?